DPDK CI discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
	Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
	ci@dpdk.org, Michael Santana <msantana@redhat.com>,
	Lincoln Lavoie <lylavoie@iol.unh.edu>,
	dpdklab <dpdklab@iol.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [RFC] Proposal for allowing rerun of tests
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:02:51 -0400
Message-ID: <f7t5z0fr884.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2009041.gKtNCFKaKa@thomas> (Thomas Monjalon's message of "Tue, 13 Apr 2021 17:17:06 +0200")

Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:

> 13/04/2021 17:04, Bruce Richardson:
>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:59:00PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 4:47 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > 13/04/2021 15:50, Aaron Conole:
>> > >
>> > > > One proposal we (Michael and I) have toyed with for our lab is having
>> > > > the infrastructure monitor patchwork comments for a restart flag, and
>> > > > kick off based on that information.  Patchwork tracks all of the
>> > > > comments for each patch / series so we could look at the series that
>> > > > are still in a state for 'merging' (new, assigned, etc) and check the
>> > > > patch .comments API for new comments.  Getting the data from PW should
>> > > > be pretty simple - but I think that knowing whether to kick off the
>> > > > test might be more difficult.  We have concerns about which messages we
>> > > > should accept (for example, can anyone ask for a series to be rerun, and
>> > > > we'll need to track which rerun messages we've accepted).  The
>> > > > convention needs to be something we all can work with (ie: /Re-check:
>> > > > [checkname] or something as a single line in the email).
>> > > >
>> > > > This is just a start to identify and explain the concern.  Maybe there
>> > > > are other issues we've not considered, or maybe folks think this is a
>> > > > terrible idea not worth spending any time developing.  I think there's
>> > > > enough use for it that I am raising it here, and we can discuss it.
>> > >
>> > > First question: WHO should be allowed to ask for a re-run?
>> > >         - everybody
>> > >         - patchwork delegate
>> > 
>> > Patchwork delegate requires to maintain a map between pw logins and an
>> > actual mail address (if we go with email for the second point).
>> > 
>> > >         - a list of maintainers
>> > 
>> > I'd vote on any maintainer from MAINTAINERS, _but_ it must be from the
>> > files in the repo, not in the series being tested.
>> > So maybe the easier is to have an explicit list... ?

I agree with using the MAINTAINERS file from the repo.

>> > 
>> > - author
>> > Just listing this option for discussion, but this is dangerous, as any
>> > user could then call reruns.
>> > 
>> 
>> I would tend towards including this, on the basis that any author can
>> already get a re-run just be resubmitting a new version of their patchset.
>> This just simplifies that for all concerned.
>
> I agree, and it would be very convenient for authors hitting
> a strange failure: they can double check without bothering maintainers.

+1


  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-21 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-13 13:50 [dpdk-ci] " Aaron Conole
2021-04-13 14:47 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-04-13 14:59   ` David Marchand
2021-04-13 15:04     ` [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] " Bruce Richardson
2021-04-13 15:17       ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-04-21 15:02         ` Aaron Conole [this message]
2021-04-27  8:56           ` David Marchand
2022-01-21 14:00 ` [dpdk-ci] " Kevin Traynor
2022-01-21 17:57   ` [dpdklab] " Lincoln Lavoie
2022-01-25 13:05     ` Kevin Traynor

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f7t5z0fr884.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com \
    --to=aconole@redhat.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=ci@dpdk.org \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=dpdklab@iol.unh.edu \
    --cc=lylavoie@iol.unh.edu \
    --cc=msantana@redhat.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK CI discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/ci/0 ci/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 ci ci/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/ci \
		ci@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index ci

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.ci


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git